WI Roosevelt and Churchill blown up in 1941?

In 7 August 1941 President Roosevelt aboard in USS Augusta and Prime Minister Churchill aboard HMS Prince of Wales arrived in Naval Station Argentinia in Labrador and negotiated the Atlantic Charter...
WI a wandering Nazi submarine spotted them and launched some torpedoes at them?
What happens then? Any thoughts?
 
So, we are assuming that Winston and FDR are killed?

Obviously, the USA and the UK are going to have to replace them. The USA puts the very leftist Charles Wallace as President, the UK going to have to appoint a new PM, could be Anthony Eden or Lord Halifax, or someone entirely different.

One CRITICAL concern is the USA is not at war with Germany, and they soon will be. Recall that FDR met Churchill BEFORE the USA's entry into WW2. FDR had wanted the USA to enter the war against Germany--and ironically, his own death might be the trigger for the war. The Declaration of War against Germany is a probable result of this attack, although it might be a more divided USA leading the attack.

This means that the USA goes to war five months earlier than before--predating Pearl Harbor. Hard to gauge how much more these five months are worth, but it favors the Allies. The USA is very, very, hot on invading Western Europe on their plans.

I expect that Japan will still attempt Pearl Harbor, but much of the US Navy has been withdrawn to the Atlantic for operations against Germany. Japan's advantage is minimized from the attack, and while it probably does gain a strong amount of territory from an largely undefended Pacific Ocean, this difference in power is directed against the Germans. We have a potential D-Day 1943 in the cards here. In any case, add 4 more months of wartime production against the Axis Powers.

In a democratic state, the political leaders of a country can only do so much in directing a war effort. Many of the UK's victories were in spite of, not because of, Churchill. A quieter leader might well allow the armed forces to do their jobs on their own. On the whole, I think this definitely favors the Allies, although butterflies might make the results confusing--one logical result is that Austria, Bohemia and Eastern Germany fall within the Allies' sphere of influence, changing the dynamics of the cold war.
 
Intriguing for the UK with a National Gov't - wasn't Attlee Deputy PM ? He would be caretaker PM whilst the parties talk it through before the PS puts it to the king to choose...

The USA committing in 1941 to war with Germany, well it could well see US forces in the Western Desert - ie via Egypt into Libya, rather than bothering with Morocco, Torch etc. There is an urgent need for immediate reinforcements here...

Knock-ons ? Japan may feel some relieving of US pressure ? The USA may well want to focus on Germany and agree to compromise on oil etc so as not to have to fight a 2-front war.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
There was a huge Conservative majority in Parliament. I understand the Churchill had advised that Eden be sent for. I think that would happen.
 

Thande

Donor
Good grief, FDR in OTL was already too chummy with the USSR - Wallace could be even worse :eek: And double that if Attlee becomes PM, or at least is in a more powerful position than he was before.
 
Even if FDR and Churchill were not on the Agusta it could still spark a war with Germany, my question is, didn't Hitler order restrcited sub warfare?
 
I don't necessarily see this bringing the U.S. into the war. However, I could see the Henry Wallace administration providing strong military supply (and to a lesser degree, peronnel) support to both the U.K. and the U.S.S.R., regardless of whether or not the U.S. joins the war then. Expect Europe to go red under this scenario.
 
One bit of fallout for the postwar years: the mainstream of the Democrats would be moved noticeably to the left as a Wallace legacy. I have a hard time seeing Strom Thurmond, Fielding Wright, Ellis Arnall, and other old-school southern Democrats tolerating this. At the same time, I don't really see the Republicans welcoming them with open arms, and I can't imagine them going to the GOP (at the time, the Civil War was still-barely-within living memory). There might be an established regional third party that in the absence of a particularly strong presidential candidate (Ike, for example) might well hold the balance of power. One or more elections could well wind up getting thrown into the House of Representatives, where the Dixie party would be able to play kingmaker. That in turn could mean the civil rights movement would be delayed for some time to come.
 
WI a wandering Nazi submarine spotted them and launched some torpedoes at them?
What happens then? Any thoughts?
Between the inherent inaccuracy of torpedos and the PoW's TDS (I mean, in OTL PoW took a bloody heap of airlaunched torpedos to sink, even if she was disabled by one lucky hit) there's a good chance the British Battleship will survive what the U-Boat can throw at her (6 or 8 torpedos as reloaded takes in the order of 30 minutes to an hour)... and, thus, a good chance that it'd be a bit premature to go from "U-Boat spots them" to "Churchill and Roosevelt are dead".
 
I don't necessarily see this bringing the U.S. into the war. However, I could see the Henry Wallace administration providing strong military supply (and to a lesser degree, peronnel) support to both the U.K. and the U.S.S.R., regardless of whether or not the U.S. joins the war then. Expect Europe to go red under this scenario.

A foreign power murdering the Head of State of the USA, while not at war? The US would be united as one for revenge on Germany.
 
A foreign power murdering the Head of State of the USA, while not at war? The US would be united as one for revenge on Germany.

Yep. And FDR was a bonafide hero for his efforts to end the Great Depression. Him dying would royally tick off the Americans, and they'd be in full-force months before Pearl Harbor. The Japanese then may or may not try and attack Pearl, because the US will be geared up and ready to rock by the time they try it.
 
I think the US would have been unified if Roosevelt had been murdered. Now, there was a sizable pacifist movement, but that wasn't the reason for the delay. Roosevelt laid out his plans in June 1940, stating that it was then obvious that the US could not rely on the French Army and the British Navy to protect us. He laid out a three step plan:

1. Keep Britain in the War with Germany (which eventually led to Lend Lease).

2. Build up the Army to be able to take on Germany.

3. Use the Navy to contain Japan.

This plan was socialized with Congress. In 1939-40, the regulars were brought up to war strength with the divisions filled largely through an increase in pay and number of authorized billets. In 1941-42, the National Guard was called up and filled with conscription. Plans to activate the Organized Reserves divisions were underway for 1942-43. Congress by fairly significant margins supported these measures knowing what was the end result. The Navy was also expanded during these years with Essex class carriers and new battleships, cruisers, and destroyers laid down in the most massive naval building program in US history and virtually every major warship that would fight before the war ended was authorized before the US entered the war.

The US would have rallied to the death of President and war would have been declared--I can't see anybody in Washington, outside of the most die hard pacifists, not supporting it. The main difference is that the US would have been a few months less ready.

While I do think the US might have put a division or two in the Middle East--one was planned at one point anyway. I still think Torch would have happened. The main elements of Torch were already being planned in both the US and the UK. For Britain, it was considered essential to shorten the maritime supply lines to the Middle East, Indian Ocean, and beyond. In July 1941, an Expeditionary Force HQ was set up in Home Forces to begin planning landings in French Northwest Africa. In the US, the earliest mention I have found of a US landing in Morocco was in fall of 1940 and GHQ began making such plans in earnest by the end of the year and they were included in OPLAN 54 that Roosevelt ordered executed an hour after hearing about Pearl Harbor (according to the CNO, Admiral Starke).
 
Chances become pretty big Repulse won't be sunk by Japanese bombers?


Without Churchill to send her to the Far East she might do like Renown and survive WWII.

There are probably enough of Churchill's 'follies' in and after '41 which won't happen when a new British leader doesn't concern himself with tactics and strategy. Up to '40 the Allies and the UK desperately need someone like Churchill to wither the storm and talk the Americans into the Allies, but after '40 you could argue other leaders could do better instead of him.

It wouldn't suprise me if WWII ends a month or so earlier because of this alone.
 
Plausibility...

It was said that sinking Prince of Wales with a torpedo strike is unlikelyu, and I would agree. But it would be possible. Ships are both amazingly resiliant, and yet can also be damaged severely by a lucky hit. If 6 torpedoes struck in succession along the sides, she could capsize. Or if the U-boat is equiped with magnetic exploders--and they actually worked--then the ship could be almost broken in half.

And almost any hit can kill people on board...he could simply be going down to a lower level, and fall and break his neck when the ship was hit. Ship survives, Churchil doesn't.

If the two were together on either ship at the same time, then sinking that ship would be sufficient. Augusta is much more sinkable than Prince Of Wales.
 
Top